MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387506643 · doi:10.4039/tce.2023.15

“Strawberry fields forever”: flower-inhabiting thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) communities and their spatial interactions in strawberry agroecosystems in Québec, Canada, with first mention of pest <i>Frankliniella intonsa</i> (Trybom)

2023· article· en· W4387506643 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Morgane Louise Canovas, Jean‐Frédéric Guay, Valérie Fournier, Conrad Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsThripsWildflowerThripidaeBiologyAgroecosystemPEST analysisBotanyEcologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) communities in agroecosystems are poorly known, particularly in Québec, Canada, where thrips can cause damage in strawberry crops. The phenology of anthophagous thrips and their use of cultivated and wildflower resources were monitored in strawberry agroecosystems, encompassing strawberry (Rosaceae) fields and adjacent uncultivated margins, on Orléans Island, Québec, Canada. A community comprised of 11 thrips species was described, dominated during the whole season by pest species Frankliniella tritici and F. intonsa , which is a first mention in Eastern Canada. Surprisingly, the major strawberry pest F. occidentalis was absent in our samples. Thrips species richness and abundance on wildflowers varied, with few flowering plant species supporting a majority of the community. Sampling sites and local wildflower presence influenced the thrips species assemblage observed on strawberry crops. Such a high thrips diversity was unexpected in this agroecosystem. The identified associations between pest thrips and wildflower species will be useful to develop better control programmes in strawberry crops.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207